SJC: Priest filed defamation suit too late

The state Supreme Judicial Court on Wednesday upheld the dismissal of a defamation lawsuit filed by a former Falmouth priest against two other priests, agreeing the suit was filed beyond the statute of limitations.

By AMY ANTHONY

capecodtimes.com

By AMY ANTHONY

Posted Apr. 12, 2014 at 2:00 AM

By AMY ANTHONY

Posted Apr. 12, 2014 at 2:00 AM

» Social News

The state Supreme Judicial Court on Wednesday upheld the dismissal of a defamation lawsuit filed by a former Falmouth priest against two other priests, agreeing the suit was filed beyond the statute of limitations.

In November 2010, the Rev. John P. Harrington, formerly a priest at St. Patrick's Church on Main Street in Falmouth, filed suit in Norfolk Superior Court against the Rev. John H. Perry — the former pastor of St. Patrick's — and the Rev. William M. Costello, the former pastor of St. Anthony's Parish in East Falmouth.

The suit stems from an incident beginning in January 2005, when Costello told Perry that a parishioner of St. Patrick's had accused Harrington of stalking her minor son, according to the court decision. In response, Perry told the two directors of religious education at St. Patrick's about the accusation against Harrington, according to the decision.

Perry then informed Harrington of the accusation, the decision says.

Harrington learned that no parishioner was involved and in November 2007 he discovered that Costello had fabricated the accusation, according to the decision.

On Nov. 1, 2010, Harrington filed a complaint against Perry and Costello in Superior Court. The defendants moved to dismiss the complaint because the three-year statute of limitations period for defamation had expired, according to the decision.

A Superior Court judge granted the dismissal because "all the facts giving rise to the cause of action for defamation against the defendants were known to Harrington in 2005, five years before the complaint was filed," according to the decision.

In 2012, the state Appeals Court upheld the dismissal.

In his appeal, Harrington argues that the clock should have started ticking on the statute of limitations in November 2007.

While the high court found that Perry and Costello concealed their "malicious motivation" from Harrington, the pair did not conceal "the facts giving rise to the defamation claim itself," according to the decision.

Therefore, the statute of limitations should not be pushed ahead, "despite the defendants' alleged lies and misrepresentations about the source of the original stalking accusation," the decision says.